The danger of teetotalism

[saturneptune]

Luke seems very Pharisaical about the topic. I believe he really does not want to acknowledge there is a down side to moderate drinking that, to me, far outweighs any benefits.

I know it is rare, but we agree about the issue of drinking. However, this is only Luke's second thread on this issue. Do you realize how many threads have been started by the opposite side condemning those who do believe in moderate drinking? On top of that, this subject does not hold a candle to the number and anger in the Calvinism and King James only threads.

 

[Crabtownboy]

I know it is rare, but we agree about the issue of drinking. However, this is only Luke's second thread on this issue. Do you realize how many threads have been started by the opposite side condemning those who do believe in moderate drinking? On top of that, this subject does not hold a candle to the number and anger in the Calvinism and King James only threads.

I imagine quite a few have been started n the opposite side. Actually I agree with you in that a case for being a teetotaler cannot be made from scripture. My primary reason, at least in the past, for not drinking was simply, I do not like the taste of alcohol. That being said I have other reasons for advising folk not to drink:

1. I believe the health risks are greater than the health benefits.

2. There is no way to know who when beginning moderate or social drinking will become an alcoholic with severe consequences.

3. And in certain circumstances, especially in America, being seen drinking will have a negative impact on a person's witness. This is not true in Europe as far as I can tell.

I would not condemn a Christian who drinks socially nor would I chastise a Christian who dies not drink.

 

[saturneptune]

I imagine quite a few have been started n the opposite side. Actually I agree with you in that a case for being a teetotaler cannot be made from scripture. My primary reason, at least in the past, for not drinking was simply, I do not like the taste of alcohol. That being said I have other reasons for advising folk not to drink:

1. I believe the health risks are greater than the health benefits.

2. There is no way to know who when beginning moderate or social drinking will become an alcoholic with severe consequences.

3. And in certain circumstances, especially in America, being seen drinking will have a negative impact on a person's witness. This is not true in Europe as far as I can tell.

I would not condemn a Christian who drinks socially nor would I chastise a Christian who dies not drink.

Funny you should mention Europe. I was in the Navy and went on several cruises to the Med, Middle East, the northern countries like Scotland, etc. Anyway, especially in Italy, France and Greece, drinking wine at meals was a staple item. It did not take long to learn that once I started, the better I felt, and the less I wanted to stop. The pattern continued, so I got rid of the habit. There is no way that one can say not even remembering how one got back to the ship is moderate drinking. Some of the guys had one glass of wine and stopped, but not me. I am just a lay person, but I would never had wanted my kids to see me like that. It bothers my wife to be around it, and that should be enough for any person.

This thought also has come to mind. If one is a Sunday School teacher for example, would it bother you to have a beer in your hand while teaching? To me, it is so much easier not to drink. It seems like to drink lots of conditions must be present that are complex. The two main ones are that one is really drinking in moderation, and, that in your presence, it is not a bad witness, nor does it bother anyone else's conscience.

 

[Luke2427]

LOL>... you never read a a single thing I gave did you? You will not that this to has been debunked by:
Alcohol Research and Treatment Center,
Section of Liver Disease and Nutrition,
Bronx VA Medical Center and Mount Sinai
School of Medicine, New York

This is one of the premier Research centers for Alcohol and other medical issues related to and from it.
Here, since you wont take the time to actually read what is given you but choose to willfully ignore medical data presented that refutes your claim from the larger collective medical community.


The problem,as you can see, is that the tests are not consistent and all over the board. Thus any group can claim just about whatever they want, if they ignore the other studies which disprove them, or shows a different stat than what they want to show

Including your group- which btw affirms that study indicates that moderate consumption of alcohol has health benefits.

 

[Luke2427]

So stop trying to make it as though drinking moderately is good for everyone when the facts are, it isn't regarding everyone, just some -

Try to stay on topic Allan. No one has said that drinking is for EVERYBODY.

And yes, medical info does fluctuate but the VAST majority of it agrees that there are significant health benefits to drinking moderately.

 

[Luke2427]

I know it is rare, but we agree about the issue of drinking. However, this is only Luke's second thread on this issue. Do you realize how many threads have been started by the opposite side condemning those who do believe in moderate drinking? On top of that, this subject does not hold a candle to the number and anger in the Calvinism and King James only threads.

Thanks for pointing those things out.

 

[Luke2427]

I imagine quite a few have been started n the opposite side. Actually I agree with you in that a case for being a teetotaler cannot be made from scripture. My primary reason, at least in the past, for not drinking was simply, I do not like the taste of alcohol. That being said I have other reasons for advising folk not to drink:

Excellent!

1. I believe the health risks are greater than the health benefits.

Just not true for most people. The fact that whole NATIONS drink regularly and tend to be healthier than average (like France) is sufficient proof to establish- if not the health BENEFITS- definitely the fact that it is not a health detriment.

2. There is no way to know who when beginning moderate or social drinking will become an alcoholic with severe consequences.

There is no way to know if one is going to become a caffeine addict so you would have one never drink tea or coffee.

There is no way to know if one is going to be a sex addict so you would encourage all young people to totally abstain.

There is no way to know if one is going wreck the car and die so you would promote total vehicular abstinence.

Do you see the flaw in this line of reasoning?

3. And in certain circumstances, especially in America, being seen drinking will have a negative impact on a person's witness. This is not true in Europe as far as I can tell.

I agree with this one. That's why I don't advocate drinking in most public places in America. But it is also why I DO start these threads. I'd like to do my part to reverse this thinking so there are not so MANY weaker brothers that mature Christians have to worry about so much.

 

[Luke2427]

The danger of teetotalism

Isn't there another thread about this currently running? It seems Luke2427 just wants an argument for its own sake.

...And condemning those who abstain is neither fair nor graceful.

I haven't condemned anybody who abstains.

Now, I know you to be a gracious debater but part of that consists of you fairly representing one's position before sniping at it. (Consider the qualifier "may" and the countless clarifications and explanations I have made throughout this thread)

Another part of that entails you actually posting to debate not just snipe at a distance like you do here.

 

[Arbo]

I haven't condemned anybody who abstains.

Now, I know you to be a gracious debater but part of that consists of you fairly representing one's position before sniping at it. (Consider the qualifier "may" and the countless clarifications and explanations I have made throughout this thread)

Another part of that entails you actually posting to debate not just snipe at a distance like you do here.

I've made my point, which is based on this excerpt from your OP:


" But he has something against him. He goes to a backward fundamentalist type church and his preacher is dumb. (I know Skan, this is the harshness you keep talking about. I do it on purpose). This preacher preaches that alcohol is "LIQUID DEVIL!!" [in the voice of one of the Swamp People]. The young man swears off drinking "BY THE BARREL OR BY THE THIMBLE FULL!!!" [in the accent of the folks on Lizard Lick Towing].

But this young man has a terrible history of heart disease on BOTH SIDES OF HIS FAMILY.

Here is what I am saying. There is a lot of sin the leads to this mans death by a heart attack at age 44 leaving a family of three teenagers, a toddler and an unemployed wife behind to fend for themselves.

There's the sin of stupidity and arrogance on the part of the preacher.

There's the same sin on the part of the movement of which that preacher is a part."

I won't argue, since that is what it seems to be what you're looking for- an argument with little beneficial outcome.

 

[Revmitchell]

I won't argue, since that is what it seems to be what you're looking for- an argument with little beneficial outcome.

Bingo :thumbs:

 

[OldRegular]

I imagine quite a few have been started n the opposite side. Actually I agree with you in that a case for being a teetotaler cannot be made from scripture. My primary reason, at least in the past, for not drinking was simply, I do not like the taste of alcohol. That being said I have other reasons for advising folk not to drink:

1. I believe the health risks are greater than the health benefits.

2. There is no way to know who when beginning moderate or social drinking will become an alcoholic with severe consequences.

3. And in certain circumstances, especially in America, being seen drinking will have a negative impact on a person's witness. This is not true in Europe as far as I can tell.

I would not condemn a Christian who drinks socially nor would I chastise a Christian who dies not drink.

I am in general agreement with you, especially on your second point! There, I have admitted it!:BangHead: Wasn't so bad after all!:tonofbricks: